20 Amendments of Fernando RUAS related to 2017/2279(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)
Citation 18 a (new)
– having regard to the Commission Staff Working document of 10 April 2017 on “Competitiveness in low-income and low-growth regions: the Lagging Regions report” SWD (2017) 132,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 31 a (new)
Citation 31 a (new)
– having regard its resolution of 13 March 2018 on "lagging regions in the EU";
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is uneven, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between andor within regions and member states;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report contains worrying information about unemployment rates, particularly youth unemployment rates, which have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness and social inclusion;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with an ambitious budget, commensurate with the challenges;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparitiestrengthening EU's economic, social and territorial cohesion, particularly to the aim of reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, and especially Multi Level Governance (MLG), which contributes substantially to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics,- such as those of island, mountain or border regions, when investment priorities are setregions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, island, mountain or border regions, when investment priorities are set; underlines the importance of creating tailor-made strategies, programmes and actions for these different regions, focused on their territorial particularities and idiosyncrasies, using smart specialization strategies, consequently accelerating their convergence and assuring the best solutions for job creation, economic growth and sustainable development of their territories;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduceparticularly through the creation and implementation of tailor-made strategies, programs and actions; recalls that the EU, in order to promote its overall harmonious development, shall develop and pursue actions leading to the strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion and shall aim at reducing disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, byas enshrined in article 174 TFUE, by also taking account of the different trends and dynamics;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; is of the opinion that a system of positive incentives would be more in line with the performance orientation of these policies; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that in a functioning MLG framework; stresses that employment- particularly youth unemployment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employmentjob creation, economic growth, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address properly the demographic challenges (ageing, populbeing faced by several EU regions (ageing, negative net migration, loss andack of sufficient adequate human capital or demographic pressure on the contrary) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available, therefore, requests to the Commission and Eurostat to provide the greatest detail and geographical disaggregation possible in statistics of relevance for devising suitable European Cohesion policies; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate; Considers that demographic criteria could also be considered;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and stressongly emphasizes that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy, by virtue of its essential territorial dimension;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. EmphasisUnderlines that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; in this context, calls on the Commission, the Member States and the regional Authorities to adopt national and regional development strategies and programmes, in order to use the best practices aimed at improving administrative capacities and governance;
Amendment 309 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; in this context reminds the importance of having and adequate and functioning MLG framework; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a new label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules; in relation to monitoring, calls for greater reliance on national and regional rules where their effectiveness has been verified and validated;
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see an ambitious budget, commensurate with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Calls for measures to raise the public profile of cohesion policyimprove communication to the European citizens, thus raising the public knowledge of concrete cohesion policy achievements; calls on the Commission to enhance the role of the managing authorities and of project promoters who employ innovative local communication methods to inform people about the use of the funds in the territories; emphasises the need to increase and improve information and communication not only downstream (ESI Funds achievements), but also upstream (financing possibilities), particularly in relation to small project organisers;